Attending: Frank Thompson, Ted Long, Mike Malizio, Brad Heath, Kim Olerich, Jonathan Herman, Jim Steiner, Scott Campbell, Carl Bramlett, Sally Neal, Harvey Smath, and Joseph Yeaney
Issue: Scott Campbell did not agree to using a tape recorder to record the meeting. Ted Long agreed the recorder would not be turned on, and Frank Thompson stated he would discuss this matter with Mr. Campbell in a different forum.
******************************************************************
Issue: Review of previous minutes.
Discussion: The minutes of the September 11, 2001 meeting were accepted as previously posted in the CRCI folder. Jim Steiner asked why these minutes were called “Labor/Management” instead of “Security Management Meeting”. This question was generated because the local union did not attend, will not recognize, or approve the minutes of the October 19, 2001 meeting. Frank asked that unless this discussion will expedite today’s meeting, could it be deferred until a later time. We are under time constraints today and need to move to other issues.
Action: Discuss the title of minutes at a later time.
******************************************************************
Issue: Security Staffing: How many security staff (FTE’s) are budgeted at CRCI? What is the current number of security staff vacancies? How many temporary hires are employed now as security staff? How Many security staff are currently on long term leave or otherwise unavailable for work? How many security staff have yet to attend DPSST?
Discussion: Report of staffing presented to local union (see enclosure (1)). Local union asked about lieutenant positions. Ted Long responded that CRCI has five lieutenant positions, and one lieutenant vacancy. Frank Thompson then stated management service positions would not be an agenda item of discussion at future meetings, but management would provide information if requested.
Remain on Agenda.
*****************************************************************
Issue: Working Files – Update: On occasion Security staff believe documents have been added to their working files without their knowledge which potentially negatively affect them.
Discussion: To expedite this meeting, the Union accepts the September 11, 2001 discussion, and minutes, as final discussion.
Action: Remove from agenda.
******************************************************************
Issue: Off-Duty Limits: Our 2001-03 CRCI Staffing Analysis reflects the following challenge for the current biennium: "Off duty limits will have to be recalculated, which may have an adverse effect on training, military, and paid leave availability as well as DOC collateral assignments." Given the urgency for this planning, the impact of recent staff reductions, and the policy for participation by all, it recommended we enlist the aid of the union to assist in this planning work.
Discussion: Scott Campbell began the discussion by presenting objections to the process. These included the Vacation Entitlement language in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), current CRCI procedure (dated September 24, 1997-the past practice at CRCI that everyone received unlimited vacation bids, and according to article 1, there would be no changes without a mutual agreement. Brad Heath then referred to the EOCI arbitrations (Dennis L. Ekberg, 01/07/1998 and George Lehleitner, 12/08/1998 / 01/04/1999), and stated CRCI was implementing consistency in accordance with the arbitrator’s decisions. Frank Thompson said that when parties cannot agree on the CBA language, he has to go back to the intent of the negotiations. Variables have changed at CRCI. We have to assure positions are covered. Jim Steiner said the procedure at EOCI and SRCI was broken, some staff were not able to get any vacation. Whereas, at CRCI last year, what was broken? Did anyone not get their vacation? Brad Heath then said CRCI has less staff than last year (budget glide-down). Ted Long also stated that having less staff means there would be less vacation slots. Overtime costs would be excessive if CRCI tried to authorize the past number of vacation slots.
Action: Jim Steiner will be sending a Demand to Bargain (CBA, Article 1, 5(b)), and will be requesting a list of arbitrators from the Employment Relations Board. Today’s Labor/Management meeting will be considered the “meeting” (CBA, Article 1, 5(c)). DAS, Tom Wells, and the local Executive Board will receive copies of the letters.
Remove from Agenda
*****************************************************************
Issue: Overtime Assignment Procedure
Discussion: Brad Heath stated that Scott Campbell has submitted some suggested changes to this procedure. The review of Mr. Campbell’s suggestions has not been completed due to Mr. Heath’s time constraints. Scott Campbell referenced a November 14, 2001 e-mail from Mr. Heath that appears to have changed the procedure. Brad stated that to date, there is no change in the procedure. Frank Thompson also stated that a change might come in the future, but not now. Scott Campbell asked that an e-mail to all staff be sent from management that clarifies that management is operating from the current overtime procedure.
Action: Management will issue a memo to all staff that clarifies that management is operating from the current overtime procedure dated September 6, 2000.
Remain on Agenda.
*****************************************************************
Issue: Union Boards/Picture Frame Hanging: Local Union boards are currently located in the staff break room. Recently, vending machines have been added or replaced. This has caused Union boards to be moved. The Local Union would like to make suggestions for change and would like to explore the possibility of hanging picture frames to display recognition letters for donations or certificates granted.
Discussion: The boards have been moved. The local union asked about using the space where the AFSCME union boards had been removed from as a location for a locked cabinet for union use.
Action: Frank Thompson will speak with Scott Campbell after researching this request.
Remove from Agenda.
******************************************************************
Issue: Security “Post” Changes: the Local Union would like to know the philosophy behind any potential “Post” changes that might be made for the scheduled October 7, 2001 shift change. This discussion should be of particular relevance with the institutional change to an all male facility.
Discussion: No discussion. Local union requested this item be removed due to the timeliness of the issue.
Action: Remove from agenda
*****************************************************************
Issue: Other Funded Positions: Because of the funding volatilities of OF positions, and the potentials of having to release someone from employment when the OF sources are not available (and an inability to absorb staff into GF positions), we may need to exempt other fund positions from the weekends and days off bidding process. Labor needs to be informed of these issues and given an opportunity (per CBA) to provide input.
Discussion: Frank Thompson said there was an audit issue that raises this question, re: using general funds to support other fund positions. Scott Campbell asked if Other Fund positions could relieve General Fund positions, and vice versa: Frank Thompson said it should not happen either way.
Action: Defer to a later meeting, as this issue remains a policy decision to be made by the DOC Executive Management Team.
Remain on Agenda
*****************************************************************
Issue: First Step Grievance Contact Form: Immediate Supervisor Grievance Work Sheet discussion.
Discussion: The new form was developed for OIC’s and will document that dialogue between them and the grievant has been completed. Scott Campbell asked if this was a management form (tool) only, and Brad Heath responded in the affirmative. The grievance process remains the same; this form will be used by management to attempt to resolve issues at the lowest level possible. The employee does not have to sign this form, may never see the form, and is held harmless if the form is not completed by the OIC. Scott Campbell further clarified, with management agreement, there may continue to be instances where a union representative performs step 1 of the grievance process instead of the eventual grievant.
Action: Jim Steiner asked that AFSCME Local 3941 be removed from the cc: section of the form, and this was agreed. It was further agreed by Jim Steiner and Jonathan Herman that the lack of presence of this form would not constitute a procedural flaw in the grievance process, as the form is a management tool only. Ted Long stated that training on this form would be presented at the next Security Labor/Management Meeting, and the AFSCME Local 3941 Executive Board, and others they want, are invited to attend this training. OIC’s would receive training at this time. Jonathan Herman and Kevin Dull will conduct the training.
Remain on Agenda
*****************************************************************
Evaluation
of Meeting (These items were not completed due to time constraints)
A.
Action
items listed and reviewed for clarity, effective discussion, clear action items.
B.
Consensus
of meeting value.
C. Suggested agenda items for the next labor/management meeting.
Next
Meeting: Friday, December 21, 2001
at 6:15 AM.
SECURITY
STAFFING UPDATE
Budgeted
General Fund Institution Security Positions (FTE):
Sergeant 7
Corporal 9
Officer 49
Sub Total 65
Budgeted
General Fund Work Crew Positions (FTE)